Only independence can remove the democratic deficit. Scottish independence is the cosmopolitan choice. There will be some economic damage, uncertainty, and a new currency. No has, in some ways, a stronger case in the second referendum but a far lower chance of success: it will lose because there will be no-one out there able to tell the No story.
Brexit is a Godsend for the strongest Yes stories:
- Only independence can remove the democratic deficit and guarantee that we make our own decisions.
... Most voters in Scotland have tended to vote Labour or SNP in Westminster elections, but they often get a UK Tory government. So, a government with no legitimacy in Scotland makes decisions on our behalf, and there is nothing the Scottish Government can do about it. In the campaign for devolution, this story developed in opposition to the Thatcherite imposition of things like the poll tax. In the campaign for independence, the poll tax became the bedroom tax.
In the next campaign for independence, the Brexit vote will become an important symbol for this argument: we voted overwhelmingly to stay in the EU and we are being dragged out against our will by England (and Wales). ... This argument will win the day, for two reasons. First, most of the 45% who voted Yes in 2014 seem like a sure bet for the next vote. Second, there are some people who voted No on the assumption of remaining in the UK in the EU. They now have to choose between (a) in the UK and out of the EU, or (b) in the EU and out of the UK.
- Scottish independence is the cosmopolitan choice
It was too easy for opponents to argue in 2014 that nationalism was parochialism: by focusing on Scotland, you are removing yourself from the world. The counter-argument – let’s become independent to play a more positive role in that world – was relatively difficult to make. Now, the door is open to argue that the Brexit vote reflects a Little England mentality, and that only Scottish independence offers the chance to cooperate fully with our European partners. In Scotland, cosmopolitan voters will share a campaign with nationalist voters.
Put these parts together and you have this story: independence is the only solution to being ruled from afar by the Tories who are determined (with the help of UKIP) to turn us into a Little England state which blames immigrants or the rest of the world for its problems.
The No story:
1. Economic damage, uncertainty, and the currency issue
‘Better Together’ campaigned hard on the idea that a Yes vote will be economically damaging, producing a major government deficit in the short term with no guarantee of improvement in the long term. ... They also argued that Scotland could no longer use Sterling if independent.
2. The Yes vote meant all things to all people.
A further No argument related to the idea that all sorts of people were making all sorts of claims about a future independent Scotland, and that they couldn’t all be right. The Scottish Government’s ‘White Paper’ was more sensible, but was still built on hope more than expectation.
A third new part of the story: we now see what happens when you vote to leave (and it’s bad)
The biggest effect of the Brexit on the No story is that we can already see what happens when people vote to leave a political union:
- We immediately see that people were making all sorts of promises that they couldn’t keep. It’s easy to say what you are leaving behind, but not what you will do instead.
- We immediately see some frightening economic consequences.
- We are about to discover how our former political partners will react, and it doesn’t look like they’ll simply hug us and wish us all the best.
- the No campaign will be about emphasising this uncertainty.
In the end, it comes down to who will tell these Yes/ No stories and how well they do it
The main problem for a new No campaign is that it...will [not] have the same backing. Yet, [the 2014 campaign] was damaging to Scottish Labour and ... they’ll [not] sign up a second time, particularly since many members will vote Yes next time. It will be largely down to ... the Scottish Conservatives.
In contrast, the SNP is a highly professional outfit, which lost a referendum but gained a huge membership, has a very popular leadership, and still enjoys an incredibly strong image of governing competence.
the irony may be that No has, in some ways, a stronger case in the second referendum but a far lower chance of success: it will lose because there will be no-one out there able to tell the No story.
This emphasis on telling simple stories well matters more than we would like to admit. The facts don’t speak for themselves: you turn them into a story to engage with people’s existing biases and tendency to base decisions on very little information. So, who will tell and listen to the No story the next time around?