Mr Scotland, chauvinism and the SNP’s big-tent nationalism
In Edinburgh, Alex Salmond walks with the swagger of a man who feels that these could be the last da
By Jason Cowley Published 26 January 2012
In Edinburgh, Alex Salmond walks with the swagger of a man who feels that these could be the last days of the Union.
Edinburgh
Throughout my time in Scotland I was asked, again and again, the same question, rhetorically or otherwise: can anyone stop Alex Salmond? At present, the Scottish National Party leader and First Minister seems pretty much unstoppable. A cult of personality exists around him. He is the Big Man, without political equal or rival in his homeland. He moves with the buoyancy and swagger of one who feels that these could be the last days of the United Kingdom.
Many of his old adversaries - Donald Dewar, Robin Cook, Jim Wallace, Jack McConnell, Gordon Brown - are dead or in retreat. He is the leader of the new establishment in Scotland, a formidable machine politician with the stamina, tenacity and opportunism of a Latin American charismatic. He is a kind of pale-faced, northern European Lula da Silva and his pro-market social-democratic populism, as with Lula's in Brazil, is proving to be very appealing to a Scottish electorate that had grown weary of Labour's client state and its entrenched culture of cronyism, and which long ago gave up on the Conservatives.
“When a Scotchman sets out from this port for England," Dr Johnson once said to his biographer James Boswell of the Firth of Forth seen from Edinburgh Castle, "he forgets his native country." It was never so for Salmond: during his years of exile in London as an MP he did not stop believing that he could break the British state and create an independent Scotland. For Salmond, Scotland was a proud nation without a state, if not quite a colony of imperial England's then an inferior partner in an unhappy union: exploited, condescended to. This was the grievance that fired his restless ambition and gave definition to his complaints. In politics it always helps to have conviction, as Margaret Thatcher did, and to believe in something big; to have a project and a clear and defined enemy. For Salmond, the enemy is England and the British state.
The SNP leader has never been in a hurry. He is a gradualist. He knows where his journey ends and where he wishes to plant his flag of victory - through the heart of the last British prime minister. But he knows, too, that most Scots remain sceptical of full independence, which is why in these early skirmishes over the 2014 referendum he is being flexible and pragmatic, cravenly shifting his position on the EU and the euro and exploring the possibilities of a third way between the status quo and independence, between a straight yes and no.
He operates with the freedom of one who knows that there is no one commanding opponent to challenge him - at least not yet. David Cameron, so nimble in a crisis and so fluent, is the only politician in Britain who could be his match but he has larger problems: in spite of his Scottish surname, he knows that as an upper-middle-class English Conservative - Eton-educated and plummily poised - he would in all likelihood be received with derision in Scotland as and when the time came for him to go up against Salmond in the pulpit.
Then there is Gordon Brown, who keeps his silence at home in Fife. "He's lost confidence," I was told by one of his former aides. "He keeps asking himself - 'What was that all about?' He can't quite believe what has happened to him and to Labour." Brown holds Salmond in as much contempt as Cameron and George Osborne do. But they have power and he doesn't; they ultimately won and he lost.
The scale of the defeat in the Scottish Parliament election of May 2011 was a shock from which Labour has not recovered. The proportional voting system was set up in Scotland - or rigged, if you will - to prevent any one party from achieving the kind of majority won by the SNP, and with it a mandate to hold a referendum on independence.
“The SNP victory took me completely by surprise, which feeds into a more general lack of awareness of what was happening in Scotland," Johann Lamont, elected as leader of the Scottish Labour Party in December, told me when I visited her at Holyrood. "We did not recognise what was happening to the Labour vote nor the way in which the SNP were positioning themselves, being both left, right and centre. And actually, they were putting a triple block virtually on the question of independence. It is their only policy, but that wasn't their message . . . We did not recognise the scale of the challenge in taking on a party which had constructed a coalition that included Tommy Sheridan and Brian Souter [a businessman and Christian fundamentalist]. So there is no politics there actually. This is all about identity and who is Scottish. I don't think in all honesty the Labour Party ever managed to include someone from the ultra left [Sheridan] and someone who is a right-wing homophobe [Souter]. Yes, you can strike coalitions, but if they are based on principle and politics."
For Lamont, Salmond is not a social democrat: he's a single-issue opportunist. "Are they a social-democratic party? Some of them are. Alex Salmond isn't. I think he said: 'I don't have a problem with Thatcher's economics, it was the social consequences I have a problem with.' Why would you make a distinction between the two? How can you separate off a decision to destroy the mining industry and then be sad because the mining communities have been destroyed along with it? One of his key advisers, George Mathewson, is a Thatcherite.
“What is my problem with David Cameron? He is a Tory. What is Alex Salmond's problem with him? He's English. I don't mind people being nationalists. I worry when it trips over into chauvinism and I'm frustrated when it becomes a substitute for arguing about real politics."
On the issue of independence, Lamont says that Salmond "wants it to come down to a fight between himself and the Conservatives. Alex Salmond wants to say that those who disagree with him are talking down Scotland, that our vision of Scotland within the United Kingdom is a conservative one. He is making arguments for us that we are not making . . . Alex Salmond wants to be Mr Scotland. But he is not trying to separate us all from some kind of colonial empire. It is a partnership. There will be a Labour campaign that will be making the point about why you would want to stay strong within the United Kingdom." As for Salmond, "If he gets into a place where it looks as if he is trying to fix things, or be canny or clever, or whatever, that will damage him. And a lot of people in Scotland don't agree with him."
We will find out for sure soon enough.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists


57 comments
Labour's strategy appears to be that they will be so jaw droppingly inadequate and bereft of ideas that we will vote against independence on the grounds of not wanting to live in a one-party state.
It's genuis really.
Why they don't argue in favour of devo-max and take the majority of Scots with them I have no idea. They really are useless...
As an occasional Labour voter I put my head in my hands when they choose Johann Lamont as leader, part of the Team Iain Gray that spent so long defining themselves as 'we're not Alex Salmond and the SNP' they forgot to try and look like an alternative administration.
Progressive voices like Malcolm Chisholm and Henry McLeish are lone voices in the wilderness.
If Labour oppose Devo Max just to scupper Salmond and campaign for the Union with the Tories then it will surely be the end of them in Scotland.
Inkles Baa -
well said
Christian Wright is spot on. The article is way off. and not researched There is no cult of Salmond. There is a democratic movement which has been progressing over 40 plus years. We are really into the smears and fears now. What I fear is the no vote negative tactics - the too poor, too stupid tactics, the artificial setting of West against East etc. Let us see!
mike cobley
I seldom comment on other posters but...
You end up in your post playing the race card - shame on you. Johann Lamont already has a murky history in Holyrood and her days are numbered - she's playing the race card because she's desperate... you're playing it as a point scoring device.
As far as the rest of your points - nonsense.
A country does far better representing its own interests than being represented by others with a different, somtimes conflictual agenda.
All your points are old tired hat.
Henry McLeish is the leader in exile and the man Labour ought to turn to. Brought down by malcontents within his own party Labour are now reaping what they have sown for so long. It will indeed be the end of them soon and hopefully a progressive, centre left movement can grow which is rooted in allowing Scots to think for themselves.
Diane - it saddens me that folk down south so understandably think that. I remember asking my grandfather years ago about independence and he told me that he fought in the war alongside geordies, scousers, cornishmen, cockneys etc and as far as he was concerned they were all his brothers. I thought then and still do that that will do for me.
I hope we remain part of the union and end up with some further devolvement of powers (mainly economic) and wish that Labour had the wit to argue in favour of just that. They are driving people towards Salmond with their current position.
@scottish republic - "You end up in your post playing the race card."
I most certainly did not! I have stood and argued against bigotry and racism all my adult life. You might want to try reading what I actually wrote, rather than the funny sounds you heard in yr head.
And Willie - ah, right, I see, so your 'local politics' has nothing to do with common humanity. Damn, I`m so lucky to have you around to put me right. I`ll just stick to dreaming about a better, more enlightened future for everyone in these isles, knowing that 'local politics' are safe in your hands.
Not.
GrassyKnollington. Few ordinary (English) people even think about the Scots; nevermind hate them!! we leave that destructive emotion to the Scottish nationalists.
With Independence Scotland gets to keep it's oil revenues instead of the Exchequer handing back a modest amount.An oil fund can be started the same as successful Norway(population 5 million) has.The revenue from renewables,which will be pretty large, will remain in Scotland instead of dissappearing to Whitehall like the oil revenue.Scotland will have direct representation at the EU which will benefit our fishing and farming.We will take our turn at the EU Presidency.We can remove nuclear weapons from Scotland which Scotland's people have long wanted but were powerless about.We can be a voice of calmness and sanity at the United Nations which can never have enough of such voices.
Last but not least the psychological benefits that come from self-government.