Here is a primary reason we need independence – and need it now

To this “colonialist” nomenclature Mr Arthur took exception, calling it “historically illiterate nonsense”. He went on: “Scotland is not a colony. Offices for civil servants do not betoken imperial overlordship. At any time, though particularly in the middle of a pandemic, this just looks unhinged.”

As a result, Mr Arthur was branded on social media as a “Quisling” (head of the pro-Nazi regime in Norway during the German occupation) and a “careerist”.

Let me say straight away that the language used to criticise Tom Arthur falls short of what we want in the independence movement. That said, Mr Arthur has had a very low profile since being elected in 2016. Until now that is, when he chose to attack movement activists for wanting – legitimately – to demonstrate outside the new Scotland Office offices.

We might add that the building in question is in a very prominent place at the top of Leith Walk – and deliberately so. Alister Jack, our rather somnambulant Tory Secretary of State, has made no secret of the fact that he wants to use this Union flag-encrusted edifice as a symbol of Conservative government overlordship in Scotland.

The building comes equipped with a room specially kitted out for Cabinet meetings, should Boris & Co decide to pay a fleeting media visit north of the Border. Queen Elizabeth House is a crude media stunt, make no mistake. A stunt that will misfire, I predict, as the building becomes a magnet for demonstrations.

READ MORE: 'Scottish independence is coming': Primal Scream switch from No to Yes

However, this does not clear up the vexed issue of whether or not Scotland is a colony. I think using the tag in the context of Queen Liz House is an is an allowable hyperbole, though Mr Arthur is correct in saying that it is hard to justify calling Scotland a colony in any precise, scientific sense.

Scotland entered the Union of 1707 voluntarily, although only at the behest of its ruling, aristocratic elite and not the general populace or even the Kirk. Subsequently, Scots of all classes were to the fore in exploiting and managing the imperial slave trade as well as providing the manpower to run the empire. Scotland’s eventual industrialisation was funded out of these ill-gotten imperial gains and the Scottish capitalist class made its loot out of selling to colonial India.

That is not to say there were not colonial elements to the Anglo-Scots relationship. Highland society was brutally ethnically cleansed – yes with the complicity of the Lowland bourgeoisie, but also at the behest of a Hanoverian regime in London determined to secure its northernmost flank.

And while London was willing to let Scotland be governed by its local comprador elite, the Quisling class in Edinburgh’s New Town embraced “modernity” by aping English society. Scotland’s independent history as a major Latinate European culture was rewritten to make us appear (pre-1707) like a primitive, rustic, aboriginal people rescued from barbarity through the civilising mission of the English.

Real Scottish history languished as a subject to teach in Scottish universities and schools till the early 20th century. This is a colonial mindset if ever there was one.

The revival of Scottish demands for self-determination began in the late 19th century, spearheaded by land hunger among the Highland peasantry expropriated by big London-based landlords.

Two separate Scottish Home Rule bills were passed at Westminster before the First World War, only to be binned by the establishment as inessential. This was the start of a century-long democratic deficit. Since then, each ounce of power devolved to Scotland has been handed over reluctantly, always followed by English complaints that the Scots are ungrateful whingers.

IN 1979, Scotland voted by a majority for its own devolved Parliament, but the vote was put aside by Westminster, in the most blatant anti-democratic move in Britain since the Second World War. Can one really maintain that the power relationship between Scotland and England is one of equals?

But what of money? At heart, colonialism is about economic exploitation. During the heyday of Scottish industrial capitalism, the Clydeside shipbuilders, Edinburgh brewers and Fife coal companies made a fortune from the labour of Scots and Irish workers. Scottish capitalists did their own exploiting. And through much of the 20th century, Scots industrial magnates such as Sir James Lithgow and Lord Weir were at the centre of political and economic influence in Britain. Yet even here we see an imbalance.

For starters, Scottish profits flowed to English shareholders and banks. In the 1950s, Scottish corporate taxes flowed to the London Exchequer far in excess of their population share. Later, the vast receipts from Scotland’s oil fields funded Thatcher’s tax cuts.

Then came Thatcherite de-industrialisation – a deliberate, scorched earth policy designed to ethnically cleanse a non-compliant Scottish working class. As a result, what autonomy Scottish capitalism retained was eliminated. Today, for the first time in our history, the bulk of major Scottish businesses (including the banks) are either London or foreign owned – an event that has clearly escaped the attention of Tom Arthur MSP.

READ MORE: Scottish independence referendum could be held by Christmas, Michael Russell signals

That is not to say that Scotland is suffering under the yoke of the genuine colonialism and neo-colonialism that afflicts other parts of the world. We are still an exploiter nation. Scottish finance capital is a major global investor. Last year, Edinburgh fund manager Baillie Gifford made a truly staggering profit on its holdings in Tesla, the US electric car manufacturer. Wait for it: a total of £21.2bn. That’s more than £4000 for every individual living in Scotland. Made by one investor, in one company.

However, two developments are clear in modern Scotland. First, the relentless opposition of London to Scottish self-determination has reached the stage where we can be considered an oppressed nation. There may not be troops on the streets, but the declaration by Boris Johnson that he will not let the Scots vote on their own political future is anti-democratic and authoritarian.

This declaration cannot and should not be accepted by the Scottish people. We alone have the sovereign right to determine how we are governed. And we have the right to exert our sovereignty regardless of Westminster politicians – including through civil disobedience.

Secondly, there is no doubt that domestic control of the Scottish economy has declined precipitously, over the past two or three decades of globalisation. Whatever you want to call that process – colonialism or no – it has to be reversed. For local economic control is the essence of any genuine democracy.

This is a primary reason we need independence now. Not as a constitutional diversion but as the most immediately available mechanism for securing economic decisions are made in the interests of local people.

Come on Tom Arthur, next time join us in protesting at Queen Liz House – or risk sitting on the political sidelines forever.