In the early hours of Friday morning Scotland was waking to the news that the SNP had made a historic clean sweep (almost) of Scottish seats. For the next five years there will be fifty-six SNP members of parliament, barring any by-elections. The SNP’s near whitewash sends the strongest possible message, to those in power at Westminster, that Scotland will no longer play second fiddle, no longer be guinea pigs for unpopular policies and no longer be accused of being “subsidy junkies”. We are, after all, better together are we not? Surely those who fought the break-up of the Union will be pleased that Scotland has a party representing them in parliament. A party that will ensure that Scotland gets a fairer deal, a party that will fight cuts to the NHS, cuts to benefits for the disabled, and a party that will seek to end the Conservatives crippling austerity measures.
There are those who are already blaming the Scottish electorate for giving Britain another Tory Government. But what they fail to take into consideration is that, in the past, Scotland has traditionally voted Labour and still ended up with the Tories in charge. In fact had Labour taken all of the available seats in Scotland, it would not have made a blind bit of difference to the result. Furthermore, if you add the seats that the Conservatives did not win, it comes to 319 which is not enough for a majority. Labour lost to the Tories because they failed to convince the electorate that they were “of the people”. To give Ed Miliband credit, he did try and appeal to the masses as a likeable, average bloke. However, you cannot fake being something you are not. Miliband should have owned up to his privileged background instead of trying to hide it.
The fate of Labour in Scotland had long been predicted, and Jim Murphy’s shouting routine didn’t endear him to the Labour voters lost during last years independence referendum. In fact, Murphy seemed to be fighting a losing battle having to use the desperate tactic of making SNP supporters look like angry thugs, something that much of the media did well to promote. But all of that is over, and Scotland is facing the backlash for having the temerity to dare challenge the status quo. Labour might have clawed back some seats had their campaign been focused more on their own policies instead of one of fear. We were treated to public pronouncements that a vote for the SNP would lead to a Tory Government. Scotland, in effect, was being lined up as the scapegoat for Labour’s many shortcomings.
Scottish Labour collapsed because they moved away from their founding principles. This is not to say that Labour Councillors, working on the frontline in some of the most deprived areas in Scotland, are part of the problem. If anything, they actually represent a brighter future for Scottish Labour. By working with those most affected by austerity, they can bring that invaluable experience to the policy makers to ensure that the vulnerable are looked after. Hopefully it will be these people who come through to steer Scottish Labour back to their origins of looking after people first, instead of being career, self-interested politicians.
I once abhorred the idea of comparing contemporary political leaders to Adolf Hitler. This was long before my understanding of how someone, such as Hitler was able to rise to power. My comparison to Farage is not intended to be one of Nazi idealism or superior eugenics. Instead I focus purely on the similarities of the societal unrest and financial hardship which punctuated the late 1920’s and into the 30’s. It is this backdrop to which Hitler was allowed to rise, and in which Farage seems to be rising. Furthermore, similarities exist in the way that Farage has galvanised many, leaderless right wing factions underneath one semi-respectable political party. The BNP made in-roads in that respect; however, their forward momentum could not be sustained due to infighting and public scandal. BNP’s loss has been UKIP’s gain, with Farage himself claiming that “UKIP are Britain’s only remaining unionist party.” Furthermore, many of their members once followed, or continue to do so, groups such as the English Defence League, Combat 18, and National Front (UK). UKIP appeals to those who feel that Britain has been taken over by foreigners from Brussels, in the shape of the EU, Eastern European citizens looking for work, and the Islamic religion. Much in the same way that German’s had become disillusioned with the Weimar Republic and the Jewish and Gypsy populations.
Extreme right-wing groups of the UK.
Through-out history racist and xenophobic sentiment has been at its highest during times of extreme recession. Indigenous populations lash out at foreigners as the cause of hardship, which is not a contemporary phenomenon, but one which can be seen through many great depressions. The prime example is the rise of fascism is in central Europe in Germany and Italy in the lead up to World War II. Even in the US in 1939 there was Nazi rally held in Madison Square Garden. Not only is this an environment in which social unrest is likely, but it is also evident that right wing political parties are seen as the solution to the lame duck governments soft handling of those deemed to be the root cause of the problem. Just two days ago France’s far-right National Front party won its first two seats in the upper house of French parliament. Golden Dawn in Greece, a far-right party with ultranationalism, fascism, and neo-Nazism as its central ideology, has seen its share of the electorate in Greece go from 0.1 per cent in 1996 to 6.92 per cent in 2012. Furthermore, similar to UKIP’s success in the European Parliament, Golden Dawn increased its share from 0.1 per cent in 1994 to 9.4 per cent in 2014. These increases, like UKIP’s, have come at a time of social unrest created by economic depression, poverty and high unemployment.
Golden Dawn’s 1980 and current design. Both heavily influenced by the swastika.
UKIP have been derided as political no-marks in the past, however, their brand is growing ever more popular, more so than expected. This is evident with the recent party defections from the Tory party, as well as their winning of seats at the European Parliament. They now have twenty-four. Farage is a well-educated man and a great politician. Great in the sense that he knows how to play the game, he knows what people want to hear and how to win people over. Nigel Farage represents the sentiment that British traditions are being eroded. The British way of life is under threat and that UKIP are the panacea for those worries and fears. He has the charisma to rise further, he has the ability to swat away his detractors and win yet more voters.
It is my firm belief that current and planned Tory policies, should they win at the next general election, will only help to drive more people in to poverty. More people will become unemployed and disillusioned with the government. They will in turn blame those who are seen to be benefiting from Britain, namely immigrants, and they will turn to a party that best represents their anger, hopes and fears. There is a light at the end of this dark tunnel, and that is in Scotland. The independence referendum result was disappointing; however, it has awakened Scotland to the power of their vote, the power of their need for constitutional change. Since September 19 the SNP has seen their membership climb to over seventy thousand, more than doubling. This has seen them become the third biggest political party in the UK. A fact which will not sit well in the corridors of power in Westminster.
Despite calls for Nigel Farage to stay away from Scotland, UKIP’s anti-independence rally went ahead in the heart of Glasgow’s city centre. Farage and his cronies galloped into Scotland on their white steads to save a damsel in distress from an evil overlord. UKIP’s representatives from around the UK delivered speeches on economics, health service and defence. Inside the Laphroaig lounge and lecture theatre of the Teacher’s building in St Enoch Square sat journalists and members of the public. With the action kicking off at 18:30 with a press conference, which was supposed to be led by Nigel Farage and his trusty Scottish side kick, David Coburn, which set out UKIP’s motives for their rally. However, due to delays, the sidekick was given the lead role, with UKIP’s Head of Media, Alexandra Philips, claiming that Mr Farage was only ever going to be lending a supporting role to Mr Coburn. Alongside him were Henry Reilly and Nathan Gill representing UKIP for Northern Ireland and Wales respectively.
Nigel Farage recently claimed in an interview on American TV that “Salmond has stirred, amongst 16 – 24 year old Scots, a kind of anti-English hatred.” However, public protest against UKIP is not synonymous amongst Scots. There is a plethora of examples of angry protesters attacking UKIP events in England. UKIP have even gone as far as to demand that protesters who call them fascists should be locked up, the irony being completely lost in the process. In the same interview he claims “well over fifty per cent of the people in Scotland are living on benefits of some kind.”
I was hoping to ask Nigel Farage to substantiate these claims, however, due to his absence at the press conference, I instead put them to Mr Coburn. Not only asking him to clarify Farage’s claims, but also that his statement could in turn incite an anti-Scottish sentiment. Coburn stated that “He (Farage) does not claim infallibility so he may well have got it wrong.” NI UKIP representative, Henry Reilly asserted “what Nigel actually said was that fifty-one per cent of the people in Scotland claim one benefit or another and that is pretty much the norm for NI, Wales and England. It was a statement of fact that effects most of the UK.” However, I believe that Farage’s statement was intended to portray Scotland, and Scotland uniquely, as being a drain on the UK tax payer.
Coburn went on to argue that the fifty-one per cent of Scots on some kind of benefit shouldn’t even be happening. “Scotland has been run as a socialist model state for many, many years and it has been a financial catastrophe”. He continued “the SNP have made Scotland a no-go area for capitalism and a no-go area for people with ambition, UKIP aim to to change that.” Coburn claimed that UKIP are the only true unionist party left in the UK. A ‘yes’ vote could possibly serve to galvanise unionist sentiment in Scotland and when asked how he sees UKIP in an independent Scotland, he stated that “by 2016 UKIP would be leading a campaign for another act of union, this time one which will benefit England more”.
David Coburn left to deal with the press.
Coburn faced some tough questions from the other press members. He confirmed that since being elected as Scotland’s MEP he is yet to hold any surgeries in Scotland, despite claiming his full MEP salary, and has not yet bought a house in Scotland. When asked to explain his stated admiration for Vladimir Putin, Coburn replied “Vladimir Putin is doing a good job for his country, I do not think that he is a particularly nice guy, but he is particularly effective at turning Russia from being an anarchy into some sort of order. We do not admire that he has got an expansionist policy, however, the Ukrainian problem was not caused by Putin, but by the EU.”
In order to find out the location I had to register my interest through the UKIP press office. Attendance seemed dependent on pre-screening in place of the usual rally practices, which is normally to inform as many people as possible and hope for a large turnout. Inside the Laphroaig lecture theatre there were a few spare seats still available as the speeches got underway. The majority of the audience were made up by journalists, photographers, and official UKIP members, with a scattering of the public to give it a whiff of credibility.
“flegs”
In the event of a no vote, which UKIP hope is the case, they set out a plan for England to get a better deal out of the union. Farage believes that the Scottish independence debate has largely disregarded the concerns of the English and that they may pursue a constitutional settlement of their own. He also attacked the Yes campaign’s notion of independence stating that; “what is unarguable is that you cannot be an independent nation if you are a member of the European Union.” In that respect France is not an Independent country, nor is Belgium, Germany, or the Netherlands. However, each of these nations retain entire control of their own affairs. If Scotland can be as independent as any of these sovereign states then that can only be a good thing.
Could Farage be using the referendum debate as a smokescreen to drive support for getting out of the EU? His statements certainly seem to suggest so. “They are (Scottish citizens) being told they can be independent and be members of the European Union, if you are members of the EU, their courts are supreme over yours, it really is a false proposition”. As well as attacking the EU, he also claimed that David Cameron had fumbled the referendum from the start when he stated that:
“from the beginning I was astonished that the Prime Minister allowed for the separatists to be given the ‘yes’ side of the referendum question. Far better from his point of view, you would have thought, would have been to have asked the question “should Scotland remain part of the United Kingdom?” And to keep the positive on his side. But no, on this he blundered.”
Farage also criticised Cameron’s failure to include the Devo-Max option on the ballot paper, accusing him of being as “arrogant as Edward II was at Bannockburn.” You know…that time Scotland defeated the English to retain independence. Farage continually asserts that this referendum is not about independence for Scotland but, about separation from England. His words, he claims, are really pitched at disgruntled Labour voters who are considering voting ‘yes’.
So to Nigel Farage and UKIP in general, we Scots do not object to your Englishness, nor do we object to your pride in all things British. We simply reject your policies and your ideals as being at odds with a peaceful and welcoming society.
The rest of his speech can be found here Nigel Farage speech, however, he doesn’t say anything new.
James Owens 