A Positive Word About Two Nationalists

     With regard to the SNP and its politicians, there is usually not much good I can say about them, for their quest to break up the United Kingdom puts me at odds with them more so than almost any other significant political party in Britain or America.

     However, I do believe in being respectful to people and parties of all kinds, and there are even some cases when I may feel compelled to occasionally say something good about politicians and parties with whom I viscerally disagree.

     Such is the case for Mhairi Black and Pete Wishart of the SNP, and before some of y’all out there start freaking out, please allow me to elaborate.

     Mhairi Black was elected as the MP for Paisley and Renfrewshire South in the SNP’s landslide during the general election of 2015 – defeating Labour’s Shadow Foreign Secretary, Douglas Alexander and becoming the youngest Member of Parliament in over three centuries.

Cracking night in Thurso. Forgot how great public meetings are. Even got to John O'Groats! #SNP16 pic.twitter.com/7PUlOgWYQP

— Mhairi Black MP (@MhairiBlack) October 25, 2015

     The 21-year-old has taken an interest in international issues and in particular, poverty and heath issues in developing countries. She’s also a fan of the band U2 and its lead vocalist Bono (to whom, Alexander is now an adviser), who has been noted for his activism concerning such places, and Africa in particular. One of his anti-poverty organizations, the ONE Campaign, is one that Black has been a member of since she was 14, and earlier this year, she was invited by ONE to see their charity work on display in Kenya.

     While there, she noted the importance of international aid in the effort to combat AIDS and other life-threatening diseases in places such as Kenya, and praised the UK Government for its role in providing critical aid. In one case, she said that the “drugs British aid has funded” is the reason for an HIV-positive woman named Mary along with her children still being alive after her husband had infected and abandoned her.

     Black also said that British aid has been used to help educate people on the basics of things such as the preventing the spread of sexually transmitted diseases and the Daily Record reported that international aid by countries such as Britain has contributed to the significant drops in new infections and disease-related deaths.

     At a time when foreign aid is hotly debated and criticized in the UK – especially with Prime Minister David Cameron’s decision to increase aid outlays to 0.7% of GDP, Black said:

“It’s very rare to find me praising the Government but Britain is one of the better countries in terms of commitment to foreign aid…and having seen the difference it makes to people’s lives, I think it’s highly important that we maintain that level of support.”

UK Aid being delivered in Dubai.  Image Credit: UK Department for International Development via Flickr cc

     Indeed, while it may be rare for Black to saying anything good about the UK Government, the fact is that she did so as a Scottish nationalist who wishes to see the end of Britain. But her willingness to offer praise for the country in its aid commitments across the world is perhaps a sign of political maturity on her part, and even perhaps a small bit of respect for being British.

     Meanwhile, Black’s veteran Commons colleague Pete Wishart has done his own bit to be engaged as person representing the UK while the Union exists with Scotland firmly part of it.

     The MP for Perth and North Perthshire was first elected in 2001, and with his skills as a keyboard player, he joined with other MP’s in 2004 to form the MP4 Band – the world’s only parliamentary rock band. It consists of Wishart, Labour MP Kevin Brennan (guitar and vocals), former Labour MP Ian Cawsey (bass guitar and vocals), and Conservative MP Sir Greg Knight (drums).

     According to their website, the band has:

“helped to raise over £1 million for charity since their first gig in February of [2004]. When the Parliamentary timetable permits, they perform at charitable events around the country and actively encourage young people to take an interest in music.”

     In 12 years, MP4 have performed at many venues both private and public throughout the United Kingdom, and have the distinction of being the first musicians to perform in the 900 year old Westminster Hall – a place steeped in British political history – when they were in concert before over 1,000 MP’s, Peers, and parliamentary staff as part of the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee celebrations in May 2012. Most recently, they attended the 2016 Brit Awards and functioned as the house band for a special show in London hosted by comedian Matt Forde.

     They have also produced and released two albums (with a third on the way this year) containing a mix of cover pieces and their own original tracks. Their first single on EMI was downloaded by then Prime Minister Tony Blair in 2005.

Did you know that MP4 have helped raise over £1m for charity - receiving an honorary gold disc from the BPI. pic.twitter.com/SF0t3NpBXu

— MP4 Band (@MP4RockBand) January 22, 2016

     In addition, the cross-party band has received numerous awards and accolades, including the title of “Alternative Parliamentary Entertainers” in 2011 and a commemorative disk in 2014 by the British Phonographic Industry – the trade association for the British music recording industry – in recognition for their fund raising efforts and notable contributions to charitable causes including MacMillan Cancer Support. Their work has been praised by David Cameron and Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn.

     Now, they are trying to position themselves as contenders for representing the UK at this year’s Eurovision Song Contest, and in a BBC news report featuring the band, Wishart stated that MP4 were “ready and willing…available for the call when it comes to represent Great Britain in the Eurovision Song contest.” He further spoke of the need for “hardened, grizzled old Members of Parliament” as opposed to so many young faces in what he referred to as a “political contest, anyway.”

     So imagine that. A Scottish nationalist MP, a person dedicated to breaking up Britain, has voiced his enthusiasm for representing Britain in the Song Contest.

     Whether or not this actually happens, the very fact that he was willing to utter the words “Great Britain” with apparently some element of pride was quite surprising and made me forget some of his more – putting it mildly – eccentric statements on air, in the press, and especially Twitter. In fact, Wishart has indicated that he himself may not be as hostile to Britishness as many are in his party, and said during the referendum that he believed that independence could “actually reverse the decline of Britishness, a concept that…I feared might eventually go in a devolved Scotland.”

     In this belief from him, there is much skepticism to find, for many us on the pro-Union side believe that Britishness can only survive and thrive with the United Kingdom staying together.

     That being said, it is good to see him in some way embracing Britishness – even if only in a loose sense – with his involvement in the MP4 Band and potentially representing the country on an international stage, instead of sulking in a corner and twiddling his fingers awaiting separation. This good-natured and valued mixing of parliamentarians from throughout Britain is a display of the social and cultural value of the Union – something which has tended to get lost in debates going back-and-forth over numbers, figures, GERS, Barnett, oil, powers exercised by Westminster and Holyrood, etc. - and more needs to be done to encourage and deepen social relationships among the British people.

     At the risk of overstating and making more out of this than there actually is, Mhairi Black’s praise of Britain in providing much-need aid to Africa and Pete Wishart’s role in an all-British parliamentary band perhaps does show even among nationalists, there is some level of appreciation for Britain and being British. If nothing else, they have shown that they are capable for speaking about Britain in positive terms outwith all of the political and constitutional considerations. One hopes that they could see this bigger picture all the time and turn away from separatism, for their talents can be used to help keep the country the together and see itself as one.

     That is not likely to happen, just as I am likely not going to change my stripes. However, their positive outlook on Britain in some areas has led me to write this positive post on them, and I hope that they and many others can see that there’s more to the UK than just (big, bad) Westminster.

A Rush of Blood and an Apology

     There are times when all of us say or do things by the heart without sufficiently consulting the head, and therefore must reflect upon such things and perhaps even apologize for them, which is what happened to me a few days ago.

     On Sunday afternoon, I saw that England had won the Six Nations rugby tournament, and I wanted to send out a congratulatory message on both by Twitter account and my Hands Across the Pond Facebook page. As I was doing so, I found that this achievement was made possible by Scotland defeating France, and because England already was so far in front of France, the Scottish win put the championship out of reach for the French team, and thereby handed it to England.

     Immediately, I saw what I thought was a poetic and positive narrative between England and Scotland as part of the United Kingdom. The fact that Scotland had helped England – even if by happenstance – seemed to be in the spirit of being “better together”, which was the name of campaign to keep the UK together during the Scottish independence referendum. It seemed like a “team effort” to ensure that one of the Home Nations of the UK took home the championship.

     Of course, it was not a team effort – not a deliberate one, at least – but I thought it made for a what I believed was a good narrative, with Scotland winning against France and making England the champion of the tournament.

     So I went ahead with the following tweet (more-or-less):

“UK wins as Scotland defeats France and helps to put England on top to win #SixNations championship. #TeamEffort #BetterTogether #SCOTvsFRANCE”

     On my Facebook page, I shared the post about England winning from the RBS Six Nations page and said:

“Congratulations to the UK as Scotland defeats France to help put England on top to win its first Six Nations championship since 2011! #Team Effort #BetterTogether.”

     The initial reaction on Twitter was positive with several likes, and then I further explained in a new tweet below the original one (which was replicated on the Facebook page):

“Yes, I know the UK did not compete, but I feel that a win for a UK Home Nation is also a win for the UK and when one Home Nation helps the other, it’s sweeter.”

     Then one follower chimed in and warned that this may not go over well with some people with the way that it was worded. I responded (somewhat jokingly) that I believed that I had worded it in such a way that paid respect to both England and Scotland in the outcome of the tournament, and also stated that I would have done the same if it had been the other way around.

     Shortly after that came a couple of negative comments. One came from an individual who takes issue with almost everything I tweet and said that this was of no help for Wales or Ireland (which has a unified team between the Irish Republic and Northern Ireland), to which I responded that I would do the same if Wales had “helped” Scotland. Once comment came from a person who tried to claim that Scotland was not part of the UK, and that only England was the UK. I sent him a map clearing showing Scotland as part of the UK, but he did not budge, and so I left him alone.

     Then came a flood of criticism from several people, including from a journalist, accusing me of ignorance, being out of my depth, and not understanding the nature of the separate rugby teams – with particular umbrage being taken that I represented events on Sunday as a “win” for the United Kingdom. There was mockery and people presenting me as some kind of misinformed idiot and/or ignoramus.

     Eventually, I looked at the tweet again and reflected on it. After much thought, I myself came to the conclusion that it came off as insensitive and too triumphalist in the pro-UK tone that had been set, and I could see how it may have been wrong not to pay tribute to both countries in their own right – making it seem as though the only thing Scotland was good for in the tournament was putting England on top as opposed to celebrating its own achievement that day, and I did feel as though I came off as not understanding the nature of rugby in the UK and Ireland.

     I genuinely thought there was some poetry in one Home Nation of the UK helping – inadvertently – another one win the Six Nations championship though its action of winning its own game. Indeed, I still do. However – having known beforehand the nature of the separate teams – I should have known better than to write a message that appeared to downplay Scotland’s achievement or make it feel as though its win against France was only significant because it helped England.

     I make no apologies for being supportive of England and Scotland being part of the same country – the United Kingdom – and I strive to emphasize the United Kingdom as a single entity when possible and appropriate. However, I realized that my exuberance for the UK got the best of me – perhaps like Neil Kinnock at Sheffield in 1992 – and a rush of blood led to an over-the-top overbearing message on Facebook and Twitter.

     For that reason, I wrote an apology on Twitter and changed the Facebook message to:

“Congrats as Scotland defeats France today and England wins its first Six Nations championship since 2011.”

     Looking back, I should have known better because even supporters of the Union who I have met are proud of having separate football (soccer) and rugby teams for each Home Nation, and do not wish to see them combined or in any way diluted in the shadow of another. More to the point, I’m almost sure most members of the Scotland team and the fan base were not thinking about helping England as they were playing against France, or thinking that they would obtain some sort of a share of a UK victory with England.

     Just to make it clear, I have respect for both teams and wholeheartedly congratulate them for their respective achievements on Sunday. Indeed, on Twitter, I found England fans congratulating Scotland and Scotland fans congratulating England in mutual respect for each other, along with the good-natured banter that befits the people who support different teams in this arena, but are citizens of the country and support each other in common endeavors.

     Again, I make no apologies for supporting the United Kingdom, but in this instance, I do feel as though I carried my activism too far in an area where it was quite inappropriate and unhelpful for the cause of the Union, and for that, I apologize for any misunderstanding or offense caused in what was a well-intended but ill-considered social media message.

Civic Nationalism? Aye, Right.

     My skepticism of the above concept is based on nationalism – so often – being grounded in opposition to what nationalists see as an unwelcome, unwanted, and alien force, whether it be external or internal, and this is referred to as “blood and soil nationalism.”

     With regard to Scotland, the SNP has done much to promote itself and the separatist movement as being “civic nationalism” – supposedly expressing itself not so much as being against the United Kingdom, but for the idea that Scotland can better manage its own affairs and deliver social justice as an independent country. Furthermore, this nationalism supposedly promotes the ethos of the late SNP MSP Bashir Ahmad, who said in 1995: “it isn't important where you come from, what matters is where we are going together as a nation.”

     However, as has been seen throughout the referendum campaign and since, the SNP’s style of nationalism at the very least has undeniable blood-and-soil elements. Some of it comes from the top – as when former leader and first minster Alex Salmond implied that Scotland is in “subordination” to England – and some tends to bubble to the surface from the rank-and-file, especially the so-called "cybernats" on social media platforms such as Twitter and Facebook.

     This seemed to be the case on Thursday night during the BBC’s popular discussion and current affairs program, Question Time. Hosted by the venerable David Dimbleby and featuring a panel of politicians and commentators before a studio audience which puts questions to them, the program travels across the United Kingdom to be taped in different cities every week, and for last Thursday, it was set in Dundee.

     The panel featured a representative from each party represented in the Scottish Parliament – Deputy First Minister John Swinney of the SNP, Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson, Labour MSP Jenny Mara, Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Willie Rennie, and Scottish Green Party co-leader Patrick Harvie – as well as columnist and commentator Tim Stanley of the Daily Telegraph.

     Now as a foreigner living outside the UK, I did not see and have not yet seen Thursday night’s program as of the time of this writing (YouTube, anyone?), but from observations on Facebook and Twitter, it appeared that the SNP had a challenging time as John Swinney faced questions from audience members regarding Scotland’s financial position following the release of the latest GERS figures (my views on it here). Panelists also rounded on Swinney and the SNP for making a case for separation and breaking up the United Kingdom based on rosy scenarios which have failed to pan out as Scotland approaches what would have been its formal independence day per SNP plans.

     The fact that three of the four other politicians on the panel (Harvie being the exception) were pro-Union was enough to cause consternation among some Nats on social media, but it was the make-up of the audience which produced a substantial fuss.

     Dundee was the city which produced highest “Yes” (to independence) result among Scotland’s 32 council areas at 57% during the referendum, the city council is SNP-controlled, and it is represented by SNP MP’s and MSP’s. Given that, one would think that the audience make-up would have been pro-Nationalist, but the audience apparently reserved much of its criticism and jeers for the SNP. Not only that, but it appeared that there were many people supporting “Brexit” (which is opposed - on the surface, at least - by the SNP) in the audience.

     However, the biggest gripe appeared to be the accents of the people in the audience, and on Facebook and Twitter, many SNP supporters and sympathizers questioned whether the audience members were actually from Dundee, or even Scotland at all. Some even went so far as to accuse the BBC of busing in English people to Dundee to give the appearance of anti-SNP discontent in the “Yes City”.

     Indeed, looking at some of the comments, one would perhaps come away with the idea that Dundee is an area free of anti-SNP sentiment or that Scots are 100% pro-EU and generally think in lock-step, or even that people outside of Dundee and/or Scotland are not welcome – especially those from England or with English accents.

     SNP MP for Perth and North Perthshire Pete Wishart appeared genuinely taken aback at the prospect that the Question Time audience did not conform to his worldview of how Scots and/or Dundonians should think in this tweet where he said: “Hi #bbcqt are you sure you're in Dundee? You've managed to find an incredible number of Tories and Brexiteers for your audience.”

     Meanwhile Kevin Stewart, SNP MSP for Aberdeen Central queried about the supposed lack of local residents in his own tweet: “Can we please hear some Dundonian voices before the end of this #bbcqt?”

     This edition of Question Time created enough “controversy”, that the BBC ended up having to defend it in a statement which in part said that all of the audience members “was a Scottish resident and from Dundee or the surrounding area” and were “chosen because they hold a spectrum of views on a number of topics, including the EU referendum and Scottish independence.” They even went so far as to add that one audience member was an Englishman who had moved to Dundee because he supported separation.

     However, the fact that the Beeb felt it had to release a statement with those words in the first place is a sad indictment on the state of Scotland and Scottish politics in the wake of the referendum. It is a sign of an increasing inwardness and parochialism, and where paranoia and grievance appear to be the order of the day for a substantial part of the population. As much as it is simply ludicrous, for example, to believe that the BBC (or MI5 or whoever) bused or parachuted people into Dundee for Question Time (or even that the program was taped outside of Dundee altogether), the reality is that there are many people who either believe this or are willing to believe it.

     They cannot believe that it is possible that there are some – perhaps many – Dundonians who do not worship at the altar of the SNP and have alternative points of view from the SNP, that some audience members perhaps came from the surrounding areas of Fife and Angus – where there are relatively substantial numbers of Liberal Democrats and Tories, respectively – and that in Dundee itself, there are still Labour stalwarts. Above all, 57% is not 100%, and so 43% of the city voted No. Perhaps they need to visit Dundee themselves and get a feel for the political pulse of the city and its surrounding area's. But then, what are we to make of them apparently not being able to fathom that (GASP!) English-accented voices may be present in a city within the United Kingdom? Just imagine the reaction if this had been the other way around.

     This is blood and soil nationalism, pure and simple, and the contempt for “outsiders” was barely concealed. If the Nationalist's actually believed in what they preached with civic nationalism, there should have been no complaints about English accents on Question Time in Dundee any more than complaints about Scottish accents on Question Time in Liverpool.

     As a British citizen or legal resident within the United Kingdom, it indeed should not matter where you come from.