SO the case for independence is dead, again. Former SNP policy chief Alex Bell has published some criticisms of the SNP’s economic policy for independence, and all of a sudden there’s no case for independence any more. The case for independence has died more often than the Dalai Lama or the leader of the Labour Party in Scotland, both of whom are then promptly reincarnated – although the Labour leader also gets to die in Holyrood every week at First Minister’s Questions. Either the case for independence will be born again, or like the famously premature obituary of Mark Twain, reports of its death are exaggerated. I’m going to go with the latter.

The media debate during the fevered few months leading up to September last year focused almost exclusively on the economic case for independence, so essentially the argument for independence was won or lost on pounds and pence. That’s all the Unionist media wanted to talk about, that’s all Scotland was allowed to talk about. There was almost no attention paid to the moral case for Scotland removing nuclear weapons from its soil, only to the financial cost in an arguable number of jobs which were inflated larger than Jackie Baillie’s ego. There was no attention paid to the social benefits of land reform, all we heard was big companies would flee from a country whose citizens dared assert their own destiny. We were told a nation exists to service the economy, and not that an economy exists to service a nation.

It’s obvious to everyone that the economic case for independence which was put forward by the SNP during the independence campaign was flawed. Those flaws were flayed open by a biased and partial media all throughout the campaign. We all know that there were problems in the arguments because the arguments failed to persuade a majority of Scotland’s voters. In that respect, what Alex Bell said was not surprising, and was nothing new. He’s been making similar points for quite a while.

What Alex Bell most definitely didn’t say was what certain sections of the Scottish media are reporting he said. He didn’t say that there is no longer a case for independence. He criticised parts of the SNP’s prospectus. Despite the fond wishes of the Unionist commentariat, what the SNP says is not the same as the case for independence. Other models are available. Alex Bell wants us to look at these other models, the Unionist parties would prefer to turn his remarks into a death spin for independence.

What Alex Bell did say was that there are economic obstacles to a prosperous independent Scotland, and he added that these were problems which could be overcome. That’s not quite the same thing as saying that there is no longer a case for independence and we should knuckle down under the permausterity of Osborne and accept the job cuts and the axe that’s being taken to public services and the common good so that big companies can make bigger profits and pay their executives even bigger bonuses. But hey, at least we’ll still be able to watch Great British Bake Off and feel our hearts swell with pride as all those workers whose jobs were supposed to be safe if Scotland voted No are made redundant and cast before the not-so-tender mercies of Job Centre sanctions.

THEN there are the arguments for independence which can’t easily be reduced to a financial balance-sheet, spread out and pinned down in Excel like a dead butterfly in a cabinet. Yet those arguments never got a look-in. Arguments about democracy, about holding our political classes to account, about a written constitution, about self-respect, about Scotland deciding for itself what is good for Scotland – the Unionist media didn’t want to discuss those arguments, and still doesn’t want to discuss them today. They’re too busy crowing that the case for independence is dead because someone who was once an advisor in the SNP has stated the obvious in public – that the economic case for independence was less than perfect. Well colour me surprised.

The Unionist media and political parties have leapt on Alex Bell’s measured and careful criticisms of parts of the independence case like a pack of hyenas at an end-of-season sale at a butcher’s. It’s not even like Alex Bell’s criticisms are new: he made similar points in 2013, and they were likewise hailed by sections of the Unionist media as signalling the death of the case for independence. But the only thing that has died for good here is the credibility of Unionist commentary.

Even the smallest of criticisms from within the Yes campaign are seized upon and magnified into a death blow for independence. And then the self same Unionist media and parties bewail the polarisation of Scottish politics, while all the time they create the very conditions that cause yes supporters to close ranks and not give an inch – because if we do then all of a sudden there are banner headlines declaring that the case for independence has died again.

But the death of independence has been heralded as often as the rebirth of Labour in Scotland. Neither is going to happen any time soon. The cause of independence remains as vibrant as Labour is moribund, and no amount of Unionist spinning is going to change that fact.

All the Unionist parties want is stagnation and mitigation, no road out of the mess we’re in and no means to protect ourselves from the viciousness of uncaring Tory governments that we didn’t vote for. What happened in September last year was that Scotland was asked to consider the price of independence, but not to consider its value. The value of independence remains like a bright shining beacon in the darkness of a long Tory night where hope is extinguished with every benefits sanction, with every job that’s lost. The SNP’s prospectus may be flawed, as Alex Bell claims, but that still won’t dent support for the party no matter how much the newspapers publish the obituary of independence. Independence offers a way out, and a poor road is always going to be better than no road at all. If the choice is between taking your chances with Nicola, or remaining in the mire with Kezia, it’s a no-brainer.