Why Corbynmania is an independence killer

I and some NO-voter friends gathered to watch live the Labour leadership result. What struck me most was the sudden wave of joy that convulsed one of my NO-voter friends. He explained:

"All during the independence referendum, there was this whole atmosphere of joy and optimism but I couldn't get involved in that because I saw myself as British. Now I've got something I can join in, something happy that I can be a part of!"

He then thumped the air, waving his beer about (yes, it was early but any excuse to hold a party - and it was a Saturday), a look of such happy excitement on his face it was as if he'd just ate a bucket of magic mushrooms and was now out-happying the YES movement at its referendum height.

And this is the biggest danger Corbyn represents to the SNP - he offers a message of hope to those who see themselves as British but hate the Tories. If they just hold on, Corbyn will become Prime Minister and fix all that's wrong with Britain.

If we were hoping that five more years of Tory rule would be enough to convince NO voters to back independence, that hope has gone. Even if Trident is not being debated at the Labour party conference, even if some of his policies are being modified, the wave of hope he's generated is not going away.

I like to tell my NO-voting friends that they voted for the Westminster system and that, since that system includes periods of Tory rule, then their NO vote was a vote for periods of Tory rule. They get rather angry when I point that out to them.

Now, it has less impact. Corbyn is going to save them, thus justifying their NO vote. Unless Corbyn gets defeated - either by party coup or at a general election - we'll have little chance of moving NO voters to the YES side.

Sadly, Corbynmania is an independence killer.

Why a vote for the Union is a vote for the Tories

There are some strangely-informed NO voters that claim they did not vote for the Tories to be in power. Of course, they couldn't be more wrong.

During the referendum, we were asked to choose between two systems: the new Scottish independence system or the existing Union system. We weren't asked to pick and choose from the various components that make up each system. Even if there were bits of the system you didn't like, you still only had the option of choosing one system or the other.

That is, a vote for the system is a vote for each component of the system.

For me, I'd have preferred independence to mean Scotland would have its own currency and an elected head of state. But I didn't have the option of choosing what components went into the system - all I could do was choose the entire system, warts and all.

So too for the Unionists. Some Unionists might hate the Tories but the Union system is that Westminster alternates between periods of Tory and Labour rule and has done so since 1924. If you voted NO, then you voted for every single part of the Union system to continue. That is, you voted for the Union, warts and all.

For many, the Tories are the warts of the Union. But for the NO-voting Unionists, they must have come to the conclusion that even Tory rule within the Union was better than becoming bankrupt under independence.

By voting for the Union system, you voted for all of the system. That is, you voted for periods of Tory rule at Westminster.

If you voted NO, you really did vote for the Tories.