12.02.2026

Heading to dreamland

Separatism is taken as common sense by much of what passes for the left in Scotland nowadays. But, argues Peter Kennedy, socialism and nationalism contradict each other

Your Party Scotland officially came into existence with the launch of its inaugural conference in Dundee over the weekend of November 7-8. Roughly 350-400 and 250-300 attended day one and day two respectively, in addition to an unknown number attending live online.

The conference was well organised, making practical use of digital technology, to roll out motions, amendments and standing orders, duly explained, discussed and debated. One negative issue was the short time members had to listen to debates before voting - limiting any possibility for small-group or self-reflection.

Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana provided set speeches designed to rally the troops, sandwiched between key conference decision-making that will define the democratic structure and political direction of Your Party Scotland in its initial years.

It was heartening to see YPS endorse being an out-and-out socialist party - committed to working towards socialism, based on collective leadership and accepting members with dual-party affiliation, although it is worth stressing that the validations will be decided by the Scottish executive committee. The downside was that some major decisions were made at this inaugural YPS conference concerning our electoral stance, political orientation and direction on the basis of a low vote threshold of around 4%-5% of those eligible to vote.

The main decisions were as follows:

With respect to governance of the party, it was decided that 16 offices would be elected to the SEC (one per Scottish parliamentary region), plus eight on an all-Scotland ballot; and that national officers would be elected by all members, with all posts term-limited. Moreover, rather than a delegate system, voting on matters at party conferences would be open to all members through online voting systems, accessible throughout conference time.

Holyrood elections

With respect to the electoral issue, the immediate strategy is to stand candidates in the May 2026 Holyrood elections, with branches or regional groups deciding whether to stand on the basis of a 50%-plus-one majority or a quorum of at least 10% of members. Branches would also be responsible for organising public conferences, reaching out to and including trade union members, community organisations and socialist parties, around the principle of a no-cuts ‘people’s budget’, based on local needs.

YPS pledged that elected councillors and MSPs would never vote for cuts, and it would seek cooperation with independent socialists, socialist parties and others such as the Greens to avoid the splitting of the left vote, with the aim of facilitating the building of a progressive bloc against Reform UK.

Without doubt the defining decisions taken in Dundee were those related to political strategy. It was clear from the conference that national issues, and how they cross-referenced with class, were to the fore. In this respect, there was a strong sentiment in the conference hall towards specifically Scottish solutions over matters of party and class. Rejecting autonomy, YPS favoured independence from Your Party UK to establish its own Scotland agenda.

The debate seemed to be almost a foregone conclusion within the gathered assembly and it did not take too long to reach a verdict. The issue of the right to self-determination is not in question for democrats, but the discussion in favour of independence hinged on the belief that YPS would facilitate a break with the top down bureaucratic and centralised leanings of YP UK. This will allow YPS to develop without YP UK scrutiny and somehow open the door to alliances with members across nations within the UK. Exactly how was not explained or even ruminated on. In this respect the discussion of such a party-defining political strategy was vague and nebulous.

More crucial still was the vote in favour of an independent Scotland as the best route to improve the lives of people in Scotland and achieve socialism. I have to say I have heard and read much more convincing arguments than those offered in conference. For example, the argument that Scottish workers were innately more socialist and radical than the rest of the UK-wide working class is not impressive or factual. The argument that YPS members working in the community would find it easier to build, because they would be working with the grain of sentiment at community level that socialism is intimately linked to an independent Scotland, is instrumental rather than one of socialist principle.

Meanwhile, the actual political aims and objectives remained vague, while no evidence was offered for arguments about economic dividends flowing from independence. It was all taken on trust - a given. Arguments that an independent Scotland was the best route because of the practical advantages of acting locally to bring change to the working class, when faced by what appear as the insurmountable powers of global capitalism, are understandable, but seemed more of a lament than a concrete analysis of class divisions, leaving aside the trenchant claims that an independent Scotland would thrive economically and politically, once it breaks with the UK.

Breaking up

The debate as a whole lacked a revolutionary perspective with respect to independence. It was more about the separation of national decision-making and less about how breaking up Britain might evolve into the formation of workers’ power along organisational forms that would also erase nationalist sentiments.

Those against basically argued the opposite: that there is nothing innate about the Scottish working class re socialism; there ought to be evidence presented for claims Scotland would thrive; and that independence would come at the expense of building class unity across the nations of the UK. The best of the arguments were that independence would divide the working class in Scotland and, if implemented, divide the working class of each nation. What we did not hear were positive arguments about how to progress beyond the British state and beyond nationalist sentiments.

From the side of independence, I was, at the least, expecting to hear the republican argument, which claims independence as a political strategy for the working class across the UK to settle accounts with British imperialism and its monarchical trappings as a basis for broader class unity across nations.

Yet the reality is that a more developed argument was not required to convince the delegates: both the votes for an independent YPS and an independent Scotland as the best route for the working class were almost a given, in a conference hall that emitted a strong, almost tangible sentiment for Scotland independence.

The same sentiment was also revealed in the rejection of this motion:

We oppose the global system of imperial domination and colonisation and stand in solidarity with real and effective resistance to these, centred around the working class. Your Party will always support the interests of the working class in any nation or territory, and understands that this is not the same as supporting any would-be ruling class group or faction that claims to represent either the working class or ‘national liberation’.

Meanwhile, conference voted in favour of retaining the motion, “We oppose the global system of imperial domination and colonisation, and support movements for national liberation and self-determination.”

Whether YPS can marry the two is another matter. And whether a vote cast by a fraction of the membership will hold water is debatable - especially given the party’s commitment to all-membership participation.