25.04.2007
Spiralling deeper into nationalism
By returning the Scottish National Party as the largest party on May 3, the third election to Scotland's devolved parliament has the potential to open up a profound debate about the constitutional settlement that has long served one of the world's oldest bourgeoisies. Nick Rogers reports
Fragmented along national and sectarian lines, the myriad parties and tendencies of the left in Britain are in no position to enter into the political battles that could be unleashed. The majority - including most in England and almost all the left in the Labour Party - long ago retreated into economistic conservatism. They claim that housing, education and health are far more important for the working class than how the state is organised. They simply do not comprehend how the working class can take advantage of struggles around democratic issues to force a political crisis in the British state.
In a sense, the Scottish Socialist Party and Solidarity are prepared to engage with high politics. Unfortunately, though, they have pretty comprehensively capitulated to nationalism. Actually, Solidarity's election manifesto shows some evidence of compromise between former members of the SSP's defunct International Socialist Movement platform and those who belong to the "London-based" organisations (a jibe lodged by SSP spokespersons ever since the last year's split) - the Socialist Workers Party and Committee for a Workers' International. On the one hand, as Peter Manson has reported, Tommy Sheridan is indicating that he will call for a vote for the SNP in the first-past-the-post seats, which neither Solidarity nor the SSP are contesting (Weekly Worker April 12). On the other hand, in the Solidarity manifesto the national question does not make an entrance until p11, when the call for "an independent socialist Scotland" is raised.
The section, 'A new vision for Scotland', goes on to demand "a parliament with real power, able to refuse to send troops to illegal and imperialist wars in Iraq and Afghanistan - a parliament with the power to bring our oil, gas and electricity companies into public ownership; that could remove Trident from the Clyde and implement a living minimum wage of £8.50 an hour."
In addition, the Solidarity manifesto contains a proposed bill that would allow "the Scottish people to have a direct say in the lifetime of the next parliament on whether Scotland should become a modern, democratic and independent nation". Solidarity sees "the right of the Scottish people to manage their own affairs as a fundamental democratic and progressive demand".
However, this is down at number 14 amongst "16 bills for a better Scotland". The Scottish Socialist Party, by contrast, makes "an independence referendum within one year" the very first of its six flagship policies. "An independent, nuclear-free, multicultural, Scottish socialist republic" is explicitly "a long-term goal". But, "In the short term, we can take a mighty leap forward towards that goal by breaking free from the suffocating stranglehold of the British state."
Socialists should certainly be challenging the state that rules over them. But breaking up capitalist states into smaller components is a very different strategy from a full frontal assault on their power. It is this lack of ambition of the nationalist mindset in both the SSP and Solidarity that is striking.
The underlying assumption in the thinking of the SSP is that small states are inherently more democratic than larger ones. And that breaking multinational states into their national components is a progressive step.
However, to the extent that contemporary capitalism creates bigger and broader state formations such as the European Union, socialists should welcome the opportunity to build parallel workers' organisations that can challenge capitalism on an ever wider scale. The SSP proposes a "referendum to allow the people of Scotland to decide whether to remain within the European Union, or to move towards Norwegian-style independence from Brussels". No doubt which option the leadership of the SSP would support.
Within the EU European capitalism over a 50-year period has created pan-European institutions that are beginning to match at the political level the degree of integration of the European economy. True, the ruling powers seek to carry through a neoliberal agenda within the borders of the EU and they behave in an imperialist manner at trade talks and other global arenas. But that is the nature of capitalist states in the present era. In Britain we have plenty of experience of Thatcherism under both the Conservatives and New Labour.
Nevertheless, we must ask how the disintegration of either the EU or multinational states would make it easier for Europe's working class to resist the economic pressures to erode rights and conditions that are applied to all states and would be applied with equal vigour in an independent Catalonia, Sardinia or, for that matter, Scotland. A united working class fightback across Europe is required.
Of course, socialists recognise national rights in principle in whatever context. But the right to national self-determination, which socialists unreservedly support, does not imply an obligation for nationalities to break away from larger states. National self-determination means precisely what it says - the right of the people in a given territory to decide for themselves what national arrangements they will make. The options range from equality within a democratic unitary state, through autonomy, federation, all the way to outright independence. Socialists should not presume that a single model will fit the requirements of all national questions - although a crucial demand will always be that democratic rights and freedoms, including language and cultural rights, are extended to all the citizens of a state, including national minorities.
There are a variety of factors involved in the ongoing national question in Scotland. Memories of the attempted suppression of highland culture as part of the early trajectory of Scottish capitalism. The role of the British state in preserving a separate legal system, education system and national church. The incorporation of a romantic notion of Scottishness as part of the identity of 19th century Britain. And the post-war decline of empire and loss of Britain's heavy industrial centres, which impacted severely on Scotland's central belt.
Above all, the fact that Scotland is a nation of five million people in a United Kingdom of 60 million means that, whatever the issue, it is viewed through the prism of national identity. That is why the imposition of Thatcherism over a period of two decades, while Scots repeatedly and overwhelmingly rejected the Conservatives at every election, gave the national question in Scotland a working class and left-of-centre coloration.
The SSP's manifesto makes the case for at least elements of national oppression in Scotland: "Scotland remains the short-changed northern neighbour: a dumping ground for nuclear missiles, yet with no say in defence policy; an underpopulated nation, yet with no say over immigration. Scottish troops are still used as the British state's cannon fodder. Scottish culture and history are still largely suppressed in our schools. Scottish votes and voices continue to be drowned out, unheard. The United Kingdom, this nominally multinational creation, was, and remains, nothing less than an Anglo-centric, centralist state with all political power vested in the crown and Westminster."
Surely, however, the key question for socialists is whether the exploitation and oppression suffered by Scottish workers is different in character from the exploitation and oppression suffered by English and Welsh workers at the hands of the same state and to a large extent the same capitalist class. It is difficult to argue that it is.
Quite clearly there has long been a British working class and British labour movement. It is true that both Keir Hardie's Scottish Labour Party and the Scottish TUC in the late 19th century supported home rule for Scotland (an early demand for devolution). But remember that when Keir Hardie failed to gain a parliamentary seat in Scotland he was perfectly happy to stand and win first in south Wales and then in east London. And the Welsh and London working class saw Keir Hardie's Scottish nationality as no impediment to his election to parliament as a representative of their class.
Furthermore, throughout the 20th century all the major working class struggles were conducted on an all-British basis. Even when it comes to Thatcher's assault against post-war working class gains, the ferocity of her attacks struck equally hard both sides of the border. The trial in Scotland of the poll tax for a year before its imposition across Britain contributed significantly to a rising sense of national resentment. However, the resistance to the poll tax was an all-British affair. The non-payment campaign played havoc with local authority finances in England as well as Scotland. And it was a demonstration in London that focused the political discontent of the whole of Britain.
The SSP has long sought to present its support for Scottish independence as a contribution to undermining the militarism of the UK and the United States. A recent article on the front page of Scottish Socialist Voice, headed 'Last days of empire', stated: "If there was only one argument for independence, surely it is this: we must disengage ourselves from the UK-US war machine, though breaking up the British state. In doing so, we can make of ourselves a new nation - an independent, democratic Scottish republic that fights, not in the fields of the Middle East on dodgy US-led revenge missions, but against poverty, inequality, environmental degradation and hatred" (January 19). Similar arguments are made about the Trident nuclear submarine fleet based in Faslane on the Clyde estuary, whereas what is required, surely, is an assault on militarism throughout Britain.
Increasingly for the SSP, however, every tactical and strategic consideration is viewed through the prism of "calling time on a union" that by denying Scots sovereign political control is apparently the main block to advance within Scotland's borders.
This manifesto demonstrates where a nationalist perspective leads. On its very first page the manifesto states: "We believe we can make a better nation ..." Throughout its 56-page length it speaks of "we" and the "nation" continuously. Yet the reader will be hard pressed to find references to the working class.