THE fervent debates that marked the run-up to the Scottish independence referendum 11 years ago would be hard to replicate today, according to a leading academic.
Speaking to the Sunday National ahead of the anniversary of the vote this week, Professor Richard Finlay suggested the reason the independence movement had remained in stasis since 2014 was because the nature of politics had changed – not just in Scotland but in the Western world.
Professor Finlay, of Strathclyde University, referred to the 1895 book by Gustav le Bon, The Crowd: A Study Of The Popular Mind, which was regarded as required bedtime reading for prominent Nazis.
“Le Bon argued that it was easier to manipulate the crowd than the individual because the former tended to be led by emotion which tended to overwhelm the rationality held by the individual,” said Professor Finlay. “I wonder if social media and its hold on political communication nowadays tends to act in the same way as the crowd, in that it is largely about groupthink and emotion, rather than rationality.”
Professor Finlay said this meant it was hard for rational argument on either side to break through, something that politicians now seem to accept.
He pointed out that in the 1980s, political scientists became aware that those who would be crucial in winning an election were the people who least understood politics because they were the ones most likely to change their mind.
Those who were committed and made the effort to engage with political debate tended to have firm political convictions and were therefore unlikely to change their allegiance.
It meant that political parties tended to narrow their appeal to those who were described as in the “middle” and reluctant or unable to engage with complex issues like independence.
Professor Finlay said that in many ways, social media had made this worse and democracy had been replaced by “dumbocracy”.
“Politics used to be a spectator sport in that the audience was invited to watch the performers debate and then judge who was the most convincing in dealing with complex and difficult issues,” he said.
“That space seems to have gone as we have begun preaching to the converted.”
Also, because debate was a way of showcasing, it meant that there was less personal acrimony because it would look bad.
In contrast, acrimony and even nastiness plays well to an audience that is already partisan.
“In many respects, politics has become more vulgar and crude,” said Professor Finlay.
“Tweets are not the best way to deal with complex issues and the idea that something like immigration, for example, can be reduced to less than 100 words is nonsensical.
“One of the attractions of populism is that it reduces complex issue to soundbites but that is the equivalent of trying to fix a software problem with a hammer.”
He added: “Paradoxically, the modern Tory Party has become all the things that Benjamin Disraeli and Lord Salisbury in the 19th century warned would happen with unchecked democracy, as parties would appeal to the baser instincts of the mob and appeal to the lowest common denominator.
“Now we are all invited and, to some extent, expected to be participants, rather than observers. Once we become participants, we invest and become attached to the cause.”
As a result, finding a neutral space for informed debate has become more and more difficult, with the press and media often playing the part of political activist, rather than neutral observer, or objective analyst, according to Professor Finlay.
“Today’s environment is also not helped with massive amounts of misinformation and propaganda,” he said.
“A point often forgotten about propaganda is that it works by reinforcing and enhancing pre-existing beliefs. So our views become reinforced and harden because we can easily pick up the material to keep us true believers.”
Professor Finlay added: “The 2014 debate that Scottish society had with itself would be very difficult to replicate today because most have already picked a side.”
However, SNP MP Pete Wishart said that if the spirit of 2014 could be recaptured, independence would not just be possible, but “inevitable”.
“Eleven years ago, Scotland experienced something extraordinary,” he said.
“The 2014 referendum was the most energising democratic moment of our lifetimes, when people across the nation debated their future with genuine passion and optimism.
“Though we fell short, the belief that Scotland can govern itself has never gone away – in fact, it has only strengthened. As I reflect in my book, Inside The Indyref, that campaign proved just how powerful a nation’s democratic awakening can be.”
Wishart said the lesson from September 18, 2014, was clear. “Independence will only be secured when we build a lasting, settled majority.
“Our task now is to show that independence is not an abstract ideal but the practical answer to Scotland’s everyday challenges – from tackling the cost of living crisis and driving investment in our economy, to rejoining the EU and safeguarding the future of our NHS.”
