SOME new research for the British Social Attitudes report published today has uncovered some telling differences in outlook between those who support Scottish independence and those who support Brexit.
Despite the lazy trope of opponents of Scottish independence, who like to portray both Brexit and Scottish independence as being driven by populist exclusionary ethno-nationalist movements, the two are in fact very different in character.
This was always understood by independence supporters but the British Social Attitudes report backs it up with empirical data.
Indeed, the report also finds evidence which shows that ethno-nationalist views are more prevalent amongst those who oppose Scottish independence than amongst those who support it.
The research found 50% of those who support Scottish independence said that being born in Scotland is important to being “truly Scottish”, compared with 59% of those who oppose independence.
READ MORE: Scottish independence 'different type of nationalism' to Brexit, researchers say
42% of those who support independence say that having Scottish ancestry is important to being Scottish, a much lower figure than the 51% of opponents of independence who take that view.
Opponents of independence are also far more likely to have a negative view of immigrants than supporters of independence and in this respect opponents of independence pattern more strongly with Brexit supporters who likewise tend to have negative views of immigrants.
A total 57% of opponents of EU membership agree that immigrants increase crime rates, compared with just 17% of those who would vote to remain.
32% of opponents of Scottish independence also believe the right-wing misinformation linking immigrants and crime, whereas only 19% of supporters of independence adhere to this view.
Significantly there is a large overlap between independence supporters and Remainers, and the 17% vs 19% of each who agree that immigrants increase crime rates is well within the margin of error and is thus statistically irrelevant.
However, it's the attitudinal differences between independence supporters and Brexit supporters which are the most stark.
Scots in favour of independence have a more civic understanding of what it means to be Scottish, meaning they believe someone can be Scottish by simply buying into a set of shared values and respect for the country’s political institutions.
By way of contrast, Brexit supporters tend to define Britishness in terms of place of birth or ancestry, a more exclusive and ethnic understanding of a British identity than the more open and inclusive definition of Scottishness which prevails among supporters of Scottish independence.
In contrast, 65% of those who back Brexit say that having British ancestry matters to being British, compared with just 28% of those who would vote to remain in the EU.
The researchers said the argument for Brexit was “more exclusive in tone, focusing on sovereignty and concern about immigration” while the campaign for Scottish independence argues that Scotland “needs to pool its sovereignty with the rest of the EU and that it should welcome migrants”.
READ MORE: Labour have 'done nothing less than cut pensions', policy expert says
What these findings tell us is not only that support for Scottish independence and support for Brexit are very different political beasts and that it is an error in fact to describe Scottish independence as being driven by ethnic nationalism, the study also finds that exclusionary ethnic nationalist and anti-immigrant views are far more prevalent amongst opponents of Scottish independence than they are amongst supporters of independence.
An exclusionary ethnic British nationalism is prevalent amongst many opponents of Scottish independence.
Indeed, this report strengthens the argument of those of us who have been saying for some time that the Scottish independence debate must not be framed as a debate between 'nationalists' and 'unionists' who are magically immune to nationalism but rather as a debate between inclusionary civic Scottish nationalism and an increasingly exclusionary and ethnic British nationalism.
Keir Starmer’s favourability ratings take a beating
Keir Starmer appears to have enjoyed the shortest political honeymoon of any British prime minister.
A new poll from YouGov has found that Starmer's popularity levels have plummeted in the two months since he won the general election with a crushing Commons majority on just a third of the popular vote.
According to the YouGov poll, just a third of people in the UK now have a favourable view of Starmer, the fewest since June and down from 44% after the election.
This is against 56% of the public who now hold an unfavourable view of him – his joint worst figure recorded with YouGov in 2024.
A YouGov spokesperson said: “This is not really a case of Starmer’s popularity falling to new depths, instead it just seems that the post-election honeymoon is well and truly over.
"His current levels of favourability, unfavourability and net favourability are unexceptional compared to his ratings for the first half of this year.”
Be that as it may, Starmer is set to become even more unpopular after Chancellor Rachel Reeves unveils her budget of cuts and tax rises in October, ushering in a new era of Labour austerity and it becomes clear that Starmer's promise of change is as hollow as all the promises he made when he was running for the leadership of the Labour party back in 2020.
By 2026, when Holyrood elections are due, Starmer will be well and truly exposed as a politically dishonest charlatan and it is highly probable that his government will not only be being blamed for a new era of austerity due to his and Reeves' decision to stick to Tory fiscal rules, but it will also be a government mired in allegations of cronyism, the first signs of which are already making themselves apparent.
READ MORE: John Swinney hits out at the media in response to English riots
Not even the protective phalanx of the Scottish media around Anas Read My Lips No Austerity Sarwar will be able to defend him from the political fall out from the decisions of his London bosses and the demonstrable inability and unwillingness of Westminster to introduce and implement the change that Labour has been promising Scotland for over a decade.
By that time the vultures of the Tory Party will have regrouped and will be circling and the populist English nationalist right in the shape of Reform will be making its pitch to make gains in the next elections.
Provided John Swinney can find a way of engaging and enthusing supporters of independence, this could give the SNP a chance to end Sarwar's hopes of becoming the next first minister and lead a pro-independence Scottish parliament elected with a mandate for independence itself.
This piece is an extract from today’s REAL Scottish Politics newsletter, which is emailed out at 7pm every weekday with a round-up of the day's top stories and exclusive analysis from the Wee Ginger Dug.
To receive our full newsletter including this analysis straight to your email inbox, click HERE and click the "+" sign-up symbol for the REAL Scottish Politics.
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