THE SNP’s Angus Robertson found himself at the centre of a spot of constructed outrage over the weekend when assorted British nationalists clutched their pearls after he had noted the demographic realities of Scotland. It is an unarguable fact that the younger you are, the more likely you are to support independence. Several polls have found the same pattern, that every single age cohort in Scotland, except the oldest, shows a majority support for independence.
Only among people over the age of 55 is there still a majority opposed to independence. And before anyone pops up in the comments section to say they are in their 70s and have supported independence, and not everyone over a certain age is a No voter ... it means that people over a certain age are more likely than not to oppose independence. There are plenty of Yes-supporting independence enthusiasts among the oldest age groups, and very often they are the stalwarts of their local Yes groups and SNP branches, but it’s a demographic fact that a majority of people in Scotland over the age of 55 oppose independence. At least for now.
Since opponents of independence tend to be found among the oldest age cohort, it therefore follows, all other things being equal, that as time passes people will move from the younger pro-independence age cohorts into the oldest, diluting the opposition to independence found amongst older people.
It also follows that people in the oldest age cohort will be more likely to pass away from age or illness as the sands of time run out on the natural course of the human lifespan. As they do, they will tend to be replaced in the oldest age cohort by people who are more likely to support independence.
Of course all deaths are a tragedy. The statistics of demography are not mere numbers. They are people’s husbands, wives, lovers, sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, and friends. They are people who have had rich and complex lives full of feeling and experience.
Every death is a loss to be felt keenly and with grief. No-one celebrates it or looks forward to it. As someone who has had to bury his spouse, I know that pain.
None of this should need to be said, but given the propensity of British nationalist politicians and their followers in this country to seek out victimhood in order to portray supporters of independence as vile and nasty creatures obsessed with the goal of independence over human life itself, it needs to be repeatedly hammered in.
However, the fact remains that this pattern of independence support is a simple demographic reality in modern Scotland. It is one which will inevitably have political consequences in the medium to longer term. Angus Robertson wrote an article about it in The National. The very same day, the former head of communications for the Scottish Conservatives, Andy Maciver, also wrote about it in The Herald. Both their pieces were based on the same demographic realities, and both explored the inevitable political consequences which will flow from them.
Andy Maciver’s piece noted that the passage of time makes it more and more difficult for opponents of independence to secure a majority. He made all the exact same demographic points that Angus Robertson did. He made the same points about the ageing nature of opponents of independence and how, as time passes, they tend to be replaced in the oldest age cohort by people who support independence.
He noted that opponents of independence cannot take it for granted that, as people get older, they will tend to lose their enthusiasm for independence. His article was a stark warning to the British nationalist parties in Scotland that their current strategy is doomed to failure.
READ MORE: Angus Robertson launches virtual 'Talk to Angus' campaign hub
INDEED, he pretty much conceded the game is a bogey for traditional Unionism in Scotland, and suggested the Conservative Party should adopt a federalist platform as the only way to fend off independence in the longer term.
It is, however, instructive that although there were two articles in the Scottish media last weekend which explored the political consequences of Scottish demography, it was only Angus Robertson’s which provoked the anger and victimhood seeking of British nationalist politicians.
There are few weapons systems on the planet more sensitive than the victimhood seeking rockets of British nationalist politics
in Scotland. Andy Maciver’s article, which made the same points but from the perspective of someone who seeks to prevent Scottish independence, passed by unremarked. There are few bigger rockets than Douglas Ross, who immediately denounced Angus’s article as “disgraceful”. He had nothing at all to say about Andy Maciver’s piece in The Herald the same day. That’s hardly surprising.
The newly appointed glove puppet for the Baroness would hardly want to draw attention to an important article by a former Conservative director of communications which conceded the demographics of modern Scotland mean the game is up for Ross’s style of opposition to independence. Far better to mount a diversionary attack on Angus Robertson for making the exact same points.
Andy Maciver didn’t say as much in his piece, but he made a tacit acknowledgement that time is running out for opponents of independence in Scotland. The longer the Conservatives succeed in stalling a referendum, the more pro-independence Scotland will become.
And that is without factoring in people who change their minds due to the woeful handling by the British Government of the pandemic, the looming crisis of a No-Deal Brexit, or the anger that will be generated by the Conservatives’ deceitful gutting of the devolution settlement – all of which are only likely to increase public appetite in Scotland for an independent Scottish state.
Support for independence continues to grow and has now become established as the settled will of younger age groups. This means British nationalists now only have a narrow window of opportunity left to them if they hope to prevent independence.
The logic is as inexorable as the passage of grains of sand through the hourglass of life. If the Conservatives and Labour hope to defeat independence at the ballot box, they will have to go for a referendum sooner rather than later, while they still have a hope of winning.
The Conservatives may be able to stall on a Section 30 order, but they can’t prevent all democratic elections from taking place in Scotland. Should they continue to block a referendum, at some point one of those ballots will be used to decide the question of independence itself. By then the Conservatives will have lost control of events and will have lost their Precious Union with it.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel