THERE is a whiff of “what did you do in the war daddy” about the attitude of some of the Indy purists, who lose few opportunities to sneer at converts to the cause. One friend and columnist for another newspaper has argued eloquently for independence these many years, but was criticised for admitting she’d been convinced of the case for Yes at the last referendum.

What a jenny-come-lately eh! The fact that her cogently argued columns probably have a hundred times the impact of a snarly tweet or five apparently matters not. Well, here is a news flash: the vote of an elector who only decides to plight their troth to Yes on the way into the polling booth ­carries precisely the same weight as a pro indy ­voter whose ancestors fought for The Bruce at Bannockburn.

Some members of the twitterati, most usually those who have joined Alba, ­regularly take potshots at me as well. “What did she ever do for the Yes movement?”, “If she hadn’t said both votes SNP, we would be in a better place” and my current favourite: “Folks like her prevented the current and former First Ministers sitting powerfully ­together in Holyrood.”

READ MORE: 'Do not deny democracy' : Michael Russell busts Unionist myths on indyref2 mandate

Where to start! I suppose driving round Scotland in my Yesmobile in 2014 ­probably doesn’t count as being a proper Yes ­activist; as a matter of actual fact I have never said “both votes SNP”, since, self evidently, where you vote matters when voting ­tactically. Ask the Unionists. And, finally, if you have a vision of Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon in a warm post ­electoral embrace in service of the cause then I ­suggest you pop round to the opticians pronto.

Pining for the king over the water, whilst serially trashing the existing Scottish ­Government as opposed to one which may or may not arrive sometime so far over the horizon that we’ll all be pushing up daisies, does not seem to me much of a game plan.

Where I can make common cause with the Albanistas is the conviction that the “steady as she goes” brand of ­“campaigning” is long past its sell by date. There are ­myriad ­reasons for urgency, many of which ­pre-date the understandable need to do battle with the virus.

Five years ago, almost two thirds of those who voted in the Brexit referendum ­supported remaining in the EU. Prominent amongst the arguments which swayed them was the likely impact on the Scottish (and UK) economies if we left the single ­market.

Five years on, these nightmares are made flesh, with seafood and fishing ­early casualties, and farming under threat. Not at all co-incidentally, sectors which the Vote Leave campaign said could only ­benefit from quitting the EU.

The most corrosive aspect of this is the fact that the devolved governments were shunted aside when the last minute, shoddiest of deals was done to ensure the worst Prime Minister in living memory could move into Downing Street. If you are left outside the room where your ­future is being decided, then you’re in the wrong building.

Yet that was just the beginning of ­dismantling the devolution settlement, ­including ignoring the requirement to seek legislative consent from Holyrood before meddling in any devolved areas. Michael Gove, questioned in the Lords last week, opined that he doesn’t think it is a good idea to have these legislative consent motions made statutory. I’ll just bet he doesn’t.

Because the UK Government isn’t so much interfering in how Scotland is ­governed, but trampling all over its ­parliament. The passing of the Internal Market Act was an all purpose wrecking ball which effectively lets the UK call all the shots regardless of the Scotland Act.

You will remember the UK ­Government taking to the Supreme Court to argue against Holyrood’s unanimous passing of two pieces of legislation, ­incorporating the UN convention on the rights of the child, and the EU charter on local self government.

Setting aside the disgusting sight of ­arguing about our wishing to incorporate children’s rights in our own, separate, ­legal system, this is indicative of a wholesale attack on our parliamentary powers. Don’t take my word for it. Pray silence for Alister Jack, the Secretary of State “for” Scotland: “Our concern is that these sections of the Bill would affect the UK Parliament in its power to make laws for Scotland.”

​READ MORE: This 60-second clip sums up the Tory government's contempt for Scotland

This is part of one of many billets not so doux that Jack fires off from time to the First Minister assuring her of the ­inestimable benefits of progressing arm in arm along life’s troubled road. Rather like that seducing snake from Jungle Book who would like nothing more than to wrap itself round your neck lest you get too many ideas about breathing ­independently.

There are many other reasons we might consider for not sitting on our hands whilst the Unionist cause is being ­bolstered and funded in plain sight. Not the least of these is the annexation of ­projects and powers under what used to be the EU’s Regional Development and Social Funds.

Instead the so called UK Shared ­Prosperity Fund will be directly ­administered by Westminster ­allowing them to underwrite what they fancy where they fancy north of the border with no input from Holyrood. Apparently this will help “bind together the whole of the UK”. Or chop the Scottish Parliament off at the knees.

Be sure you will know where this ­naked bribery will land since the project in ­question will barely be visible under its avalanche of Union flag signage.

Then there’s the vexed and ­controversial question of Freeports. The Scottish Government is opposed to the model being proposed by London. London, frankly, couldn’t give much of a toss and plans to proceed on a basis which not only gives the Scottish Government no say in the matter, but has differential funding proposed for English and Scottish ports which they plan to impose.

Sounds a bit like that levelling up fund which, curiously, only seemed to fall into the hands of towns and cities which had voted Conservative. All good voters ­deserve sweeteners.

ALL of that and much, much more suggests to this indy supporter that if we do no more than wring our hands and promote gentle persuasion of the undecided, then we will effectively have thrown in the towel. By the time we’ve got to some magic polling number the game, as they say, will long since be a bogey.

This is now an existential struggle for Scottish independence. If we lose it, we are in for many more years of ­incompetent and malign UK ­governance and ­economic ruin of many essential ­sectors. Not to ­mention being “led” by a man whose whose colleagues and ­critics are ­unanimous that he is woefully ­miscast.

If we fail to fight for our future, then independence could become little more than a political footnote; a pipedream snuffed out by a combination of Unionist cunning and nationalist inactivity.

Many commentators and ­politicians criticise those of us dubbed too ­impatient, or not sufficiently aware of the ­constitutional stumbling blocks to ­progressing the cause.

Right now the greatest stumbling block is the failure to understand the critical ­nature of the moment through which we are passing. Holyrood’s powers are ­being serially stripped out. Michael Gove is ­being allowed to plot and plan its ­hollowing out, whilst our standing army at Westminster can do little more than huff and puff and soak up embarrassing derision.

Some of these footsoldiers have all but gone native in the stifling embrace of the Commons and its manifold, subsidised perks. Yet many could add a powerful voice to a Scottish based campaign, if ­people could be persuaded to set aside personal animosities in the service of their country. And if we could get around to having a campaign!