As the referendum date comes ever nearer, with the turn of 2014 placing it almost on our doorstep, both sides have became more distinct in their differences from one another. Especially with the margins narrowing, creating more uncertainty towards who will win. One aspect of both sides' campaigns which has perhaps the most difference is their grassroots campaigning.
Anyone who has had any first hand experience with both Yes Scotland and Better Together will have seen great disparity in both sides' ground-level activity. Better Together still relies on the manipulation of the media and top-down lectures from those in power telling the people of Scotland how to vote. The most recent, and perhaps most hilarious, example of the No campaign's efforts to mobilise those at the top of the political structure to influence the referendum can be seen in David Cameron's plea to the Russian president - Vladimir Putin ("Really?". Yes, Really).
This latest plea for international support from Westminster shows two things. One, that Westminster has lost any hope at convincing the Scottish people to vote No on their own. They know the people of Scotland are becoming increasingly aware of the disparity that lies between our interests, and theirs. No longer can they appeal to the jingoism of post-war British unity to inspire Scottish people to vote No. And two, that Britain is still locked in the past era of Cold War underhand governmental negotiations to stifle the contrary interests of their people.
Unsurprisingly, the No campaign have been quiet on this subject. Most No mouthpieces simply stating that any criticism of David Cameron's actions is "childish rhetoric". Better Together's silence on such a blatant underhand and dishonest tactic proves that they are still clinging to the powers of the establishment in order to win the referendum. They are so certain in their victory that they see no need to appeal to the Scottish people at a ground level; the people who are actually voting in the referendum.
This is where the Yes campaign differs greatly. As a political activist myself, I have noticed over the years following up to the referendum a great divide in the activity of the two campaigns at a grassroots level. To illustrate this example I took the time to search for both Better Together and Yes Scotland events happening within 100 miles around my home postcode in Coatbridge (the largest distance on both websites). Here are my results:
The top picture shows Better Together's events happening in Scotland. Fear not, your eyes are not playing tricks on you. Yes, that is right, in the year of 2014, the last run up to the referendum, Better together have a grand total of three events coming up. Yes Scotland on the other hand have 38 events running at the start of the year. If this evidence does not shine a definitive light on the differences between the campaigns, then I don't know what will.
This can be further portrayed by my experiences living in the city of Stirling. Every week both Yes Scotland and the SSP have stalls running; Yes Scotland on a Saturday, and the SSP on a Tuesday outside the Thistles shopping centre for those of you who are interested. Better Together however are nowhere to be seen on a ground level.
This brings us nicely to the main subject of the article. That being that Yes Scotland, for years being portrayed as being behind and never going to win, is the hungry boxer. The Yes side is more determined to win, more determined to interact with the people of Scotland, and more willing to campaign at a ground level to win people over.
The differences in campaigning can also be seen in the crucial role social media is playing in the referendum. The BBC article referenced here says that a report carried out by researchers at the University of Glasgow have showed that those who support independence on Twitter are more active and spontaneous, and start more conversations concerning independence. Whereas the No campaign on Twitter was more orientated towards top-down interactions and had a smaller network on social-media.
Des McNulty, deputy director of Policy Scotland in relation to the findings said this:
"It's interesting that in this particular snapshot 'Yes' has been more active and spontaneous," he said.
"They use more tweets and hashtags, and have a bigger network of tweeters.
"'No' tweets are coming from the top down, and there is no real network amplifying the debate."
The No campaign know they cannot get the people of Scotland to rally around the union and Westminster as it is a sick, dying giant of a political construct. Britishness as an identity is dying, and the politicians at Westminster who are trying to keep it alive are dying with it. Thus, instead of using real campaigning as a means to winning the referendum, they cling to those in power and the establishment. Utilising both the political structure and the media to portray Scotland as a country which is not fit to run its own affairs and make decisions by itself. That the powers that rightfully belong in Scotland are better managed by those we do not vote for.
What can be gleamed from this is that the Yes campaign must build upon the momentum is has gathered. It has to focus more on grassroots campaigning to reach out to the people of Scotland as to why Scotland will be a more democratic, prosperous, fair, and greener nation upon independence. After all, it has been shown that the more people know about the facts surrounding independence, the more likely they are to vote Yes. 2014 will be the year the referendum will take a sharp turn as people realise that Westminster and Better Together are making no effort to interact with them on a ground level.
Anyone who has had any first hand experience with both Yes Scotland and Better Together will have seen great disparity in both sides' ground-level activity. Better Together still relies on the manipulation of the media and top-down lectures from those in power telling the people of Scotland how to vote. The most recent, and perhaps most hilarious, example of the No campaign's efforts to mobilise those at the top of the political structure to influence the referendum can be seen in David Cameron's plea to the Russian president - Vladimir Putin ("Really?". Yes, Really).
This latest plea for international support from Westminster shows two things. One, that Westminster has lost any hope at convincing the Scottish people to vote No on their own. They know the people of Scotland are becoming increasingly aware of the disparity that lies between our interests, and theirs. No longer can they appeal to the jingoism of post-war British unity to inspire Scottish people to vote No. And two, that Britain is still locked in the past era of Cold War underhand governmental negotiations to stifle the contrary interests of their people.
Unsurprisingly, the No campaign have been quiet on this subject. Most No mouthpieces simply stating that any criticism of David Cameron's actions is "childish rhetoric". Better Together's silence on such a blatant underhand and dishonest tactic proves that they are still clinging to the powers of the establishment in order to win the referendum. They are so certain in their victory that they see no need to appeal to the Scottish people at a ground level; the people who are actually voting in the referendum.
This is where the Yes campaign differs greatly. As a political activist myself, I have noticed over the years following up to the referendum a great divide in the activity of the two campaigns at a grassroots level. To illustrate this example I took the time to search for both Better Together and Yes Scotland events happening within 100 miles around my home postcode in Coatbridge (the largest distance on both websites). Here are my results:
The top picture shows Better Together's events happening in Scotland. Fear not, your eyes are not playing tricks on you. Yes, that is right, in the year of 2014, the last run up to the referendum, Better together have a grand total of three events coming up. Yes Scotland on the other hand have 38 events running at the start of the year. If this evidence does not shine a definitive light on the differences between the campaigns, then I don't know what will.
This can be further portrayed by my experiences living in the city of Stirling. Every week both Yes Scotland and the SSP have stalls running; Yes Scotland on a Saturday, and the SSP on a Tuesday outside the Thistles shopping centre for those of you who are interested. Better Together however are nowhere to be seen on a ground level.
This brings us nicely to the main subject of the article. That being that Yes Scotland, for years being portrayed as being behind and never going to win, is the hungry boxer. The Yes side is more determined to win, more determined to interact with the people of Scotland, and more willing to campaign at a ground level to win people over.
The differences in campaigning can also be seen in the crucial role social media is playing in the referendum. The BBC article referenced here says that a report carried out by researchers at the University of Glasgow have showed that those who support independence on Twitter are more active and spontaneous, and start more conversations concerning independence. Whereas the No campaign on Twitter was more orientated towards top-down interactions and had a smaller network on social-media.
Des McNulty, deputy director of Policy Scotland in relation to the findings said this:
"It's interesting that in this particular snapshot 'Yes' has been more active and spontaneous," he said.
"They use more tweets and hashtags, and have a bigger network of tweeters.
"'No' tweets are coming from the top down, and there is no real network amplifying the debate."
The No campaign know they cannot get the people of Scotland to rally around the union and Westminster as it is a sick, dying giant of a political construct. Britishness as an identity is dying, and the politicians at Westminster who are trying to keep it alive are dying with it. Thus, instead of using real campaigning as a means to winning the referendum, they cling to those in power and the establishment. Utilising both the political structure and the media to portray Scotland as a country which is not fit to run its own affairs and make decisions by itself. That the powers that rightfully belong in Scotland are better managed by those we do not vote for.
What can be gleamed from this is that the Yes campaign must build upon the momentum is has gathered. It has to focus more on grassroots campaigning to reach out to the people of Scotland as to why Scotland will be a more democratic, prosperous, fair, and greener nation upon independence. After all, it has been shown that the more people know about the facts surrounding independence, the more likely they are to vote Yes. 2014 will be the year the referendum will take a sharp turn as people realise that Westminster and Better Together are making no effort to interact with them on a ground level.
No comments:
Post a Comment